Sunday, 30 November 2025

Rethinking Momentum: From Mass in Motion to Relational Persistence

In classical physics, momentum is defined as the product of mass and velocity. It captures how difficult it is to stop a moving object — its “quantity of motion.” Momentum is conserved in closed systems, making it a foundational concept in both mechanics and field theory. In quantum mechanics, it becomes a generator of translation and a central operator in wavefunction dynamics.

But momentum, like energy and force, inherits its conceptual frame from an object-based metaphysics: entities with mass, moving through space, carrying motion with them. In this worldview, momentum is something an object has, which can be transferred, exchanged, or conserved.

From a relational perspective, however, momentum is not a substance or property carried by an object. It is a pattern of persistence — an emergent feature of a system’s tendency to maintain coherence across a sequence of transformations.


1. No Entities, No Motion

  • If there are no autonomous particles moving through space, then there is no “mass” in motion to begin with,

  • Momentum cannot be a thing possessed; it must be a feature of the relational dynamics of a system unfolding over time,

  • It is not what an object carries — it is how a configuration maintains its trajectory of coherence under constraint.


2. Momentum as Relational Continuity

  • Classical momentum describes resistance to change in motion,

  • Relationally, this maps to inertia in the space of configurations: the tendency of a coherent relational pattern to continue actualising along a constrained path,

  • What persists is not a substance in transit, but a directional unfolding of relational structure.


3. Temporal Gradient, Not Trajectory

  • Instead of imagining a particle moving through space, imagine a relational field undergoing successive states,

  • Momentum becomes the gradient of actualisation through which a system continues resolving its potential in a given direction of transformation,

  • It is a feature of how time is inhabited — not how things move, but how systems sustain change.


4. Quantum Momentum Reinterpreted

  • In quantum mechanics, momentum is associated with spatial translation: the wavefunction’s response to shifts in position,

  • But the wavefunction itself is not a thing in space — it is a configuration of potential over relational degrees of freedom,

  • Thus, momentum is best understood as the rate of change in coherence across relational coordinates — a generator of systemic unfolding, not a mark of motion.


5. Conservation as Constraint Compatibility

  • In classical systems, momentum is conserved because interactions respect symmetries of space and time,

  • Relationally, these “conservation laws” express the internal consistency of transformations under constraint — patterns of coherence preserved through reconfiguration,

  • Momentum is conserved not because something is kept the same, but because the structure of constraints remains compatible with persistence.


Toward a Relational Definition

We might say:

Momentum is the systemic tendency of a coherent configuration to maintain its directional unfolding across constraint transitions.

This replaces the image of mass in motion with a more abstract, but more accurate, account of how systems persist — not by travelling through space, but by actualising continuity in a dynamic field of potential.


Closing

Momentum, in the classical view, is a property of moving matter. But in a relational ontology, momentum is a pattern of persistence: the unfolding of a system along its most coherent path through possibility space. It is not motion through space — it is continuity in becoming.

In the next post, we’ll examine mass itself — not as an intrinsic quantity of matter, but as a relational index of constraint: how strongly a configuration resists transformation under systemic pressure.

No comments:

Post a Comment